Gun Control Under Obama
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#1824 Jan 12, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
What would they make?
recycle garbage as first line picker
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#1825 Jan 12, 2013
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
recycle garbage as first line picker
What about the people who do that now?

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#1826 Jan 12, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. That was a liberalization of gun laws.
I suppose it depended on who defined "persons whose trustworthiness is not in question".

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#1827 Jan 12, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>so you agree that even FDR's New Deal legistlation infringed on other peoples rights too then
Yep.
which it did to some just like what the Socialist Lincoln & Republicans did & where advocating which brought on the the US Civil War because the southern states felt that their rights were being harmed & violated and their way of life by the Changed being forced by Washington DC.
A little different... protecting people (slaves in this case) from harm or having their rights violated.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#1828 Jan 12, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose it depended on who defined "persons whose trustworthiness is not in question".
Regardlees, the law cited expanded gun ownership and relaxed regulations.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1829 Jan 12, 2013
VADoc wrote:
<quoted text>
Plenty of folks in your neighborhood have them and they are obtained illegally.
And a number of folks in my neighborhood have guns that have been obtained legally.

Frankly, neither helps me to sleep any sounder at night.

And they all claim the same reasons. They need them for protection.

If everyone was just protecting themselves then no one would ever be killed, now would they?
Pale Rider

AOL

#1830 Jan 12, 2013
VADoc wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm more afraid of the people who have no responsibility and no desire to earn anything in life. Whenever things go south for them and it comes to a survival situation they would slit their neighbors throat for a scrap of food.
I hope you are never in a survival situation and get to see this firsthand, but usually those who prepare the least become very ugly and violent when they want something to sustain life.
Are you talking about America or some third world country like Afghanistan?

If it isn't guns to protect your family from those that are hungry. Now it is slitting throats for food. What kind of human being thinks like you. I can tell you, there are few in America, that are this paranoid.

You have to be one of the looniest tunes on Columbus Topix spreading fear, and hatred. Those that agree with you are far and few. You can make some of the most ludicrous statements. If they had a valid reason, but there is none, not a shred of evidence.

Are you any kind of Godly person, or an ungodly selfish human, that thinks that everyone is lazy but you; or a few rich people that have hooked and crooked their way to become rich; like some of those in Congress, that have used their power to get inside information, to become wealthy.

Do you live in a ghetto, where you can trade guns and prepare to kill someone?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1831 Jan 12, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep.
<quoted text>
A little different... protecting people (slaves in this case) from harm or having their rights violated.
basically that was what the Civil War was about Southern Democrats preferred Capitalism over anything else including free labor and Lincoln & Karl Marxs seen things differently and had different plans for America and Capitalism was the last thing on their minds.

An Unfinished Revolution: Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln

by Robin Blackburn, Abraham Lincoln, and Karl Marx

The impact of the American Civil War on Karl Marx, and Karl Marx on America.

Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln exchanged letters at the end of the Civil War. Although they were divided by far more than the Atlantic Ocean, they agreed on the cause of “free labor” and the urgent need to end slavery. In his introduction, Robin Blackburn argues that Lincoln’s response signaled the importance of the German American community and the role of the international communists in opposing European recognition of the Confederacy.

The ideals of communism, voiced through the International Working Men’s Association, attracted many thousands of supporters throughout the US, and helped spread the demand for an eight-hour day. Blackburn shows how the IWA in America—born out of the Civil War—sought to radicalize Lincoln’s unfinished revolution and to advance the rights of labor, uniting black and white, men and women, native and foreign-born. The International contributed to a profound critique of the capitalist robber barons who enriched themselves during and after the war, and it inspired an extraordinary series of strikes and class struggles in the postwar decades.

In addition to a range of key texts and letters by both Lincoln and Marx, this book includes articles from the radical New York-based journal Woodhull and Claflin’s Weekly, an extract from Thomas Fortune’s classic work on racism Black and White, Frederick Engels on the progress of US labor in the 1880s, and Lucy Parson’s speech at the founding of the Industrial Workers of the World.

http://www.versobooks.com/books/954-an-unfini...

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#1832 Jan 12, 2013
Pale Rider wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you talking about America or some third world country like Afghanistan?
If it isn't guns to protect your family from those that are hungry. Now it is slitting throats for food. What kind of human being thinks like you. I can tell you, there are few in America, that are this paranoid.
You have to be one of the looniest tunes on Columbus Topix spreading fear, and hatred. Those that agree with you are far and few. You can make some of the most ludicrous statements. If they had a valid reason, but there is none, not a shred of evidence.
Are you any kind of Godly person, or an ungodly selfish human, that thinks that everyone is lazy but you; or a few rich people that have hooked and crooked their way to become rich; like some of those in Congress, that have used their power to get inside information, to become wealthy.
Do you live in a ghetto, where you can trade guns and prepare to kill someone?
You're a hoot. You talk about the alleged hatred and "ungodlyness" shown by others while being a rabid anti-Semite.
Not only are you a hilljack, you're a boot-licking Democrat, government worshiping slave.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1833 Jan 12, 2013
VADoc wrote:
<quoted text>
How about you define what you think would fix the gun violence. Honestly what do you think should be done and how do you think it will help?

I know how the liberal mind works. I worked in college level academia. Give an inch and a yard will be taken. It starts with an assault weapons ban, then magazine limits, then all semi autos, then all pistols. Then all rifles. Then all guns. This scenario has played out in Great Britain. It's gun control by piecemeal. Sorry not happening.
Well, Mr. Expert on How Reader Thinks, not so sure why you need to ask, and I have explained this before, but here goes again.

Too many people are being killed senselessly--that is by accident or by the irrational actions of irrational persons who have guns. No single action is going to make all of that go away. However, the rate of incidence can be decreased through a comprehensive approach. Australia stands as a good first example.

Yes--the things that you mention (background checks, waiting periods, requirements for these things in person-to-person transfers), which serve to both limit legal sales to certain persons as well as to generally slow down the acquisition (standing in the way of certain emotionally triggered incidents) are likely to be helpful. And yes, I do advocate some limitations on the size/speed (forgive me for not being a weapons expert) of weaponry available to the average citizen. Guns, whatever else you hobbyists may insist they are used for, are instruments of killing. As such, it is reasonable to set limits on those designed for the mass and rapid killing of large numbers of persons. This cannot be justified by self-defense or hunting. If there is some usage within the context of "well-ordered militias," then I suggest that someone craft a legal definition of same and set parameters.

There is little doubt that mental health is sadly neglected in this country, nor that this has played a role in most, if not all, of the recent horrendous shoot-em-ups. We need both short and long-range solutions. We need to increase the numbers of available professionals available to treat those with diagnosed difficulties. We need adequate support for such persons in their communities (not every person with a diagnosis is a danger to self or others, recall), and we need to ensure mechanism for screenings and supervision so that when there are symptoms of decompensation (which frequently include going off of meds and denying treatment) that families and communities are not left resourceless in trying to prevent disasters.

Lastly, we need to be about consciously altering our point of view with regard to the notion of a handgun in every home bringing about some increased level of safety and protection. This does not seem to be the case--based on our over stats of both ownership and crime. And we need to stop teaching it to impressionable knuckle-heads with too easy access (albeit illegal) who may never live to outgrow their immature need to outgun someone else.
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#1834 Jan 12, 2013
Leave our guns alone

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#1835 Jan 12, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
What about the people who do that now?
What about them? As taxpayers, aren't we entitled to the most bang for our buck? No reason prisoners can't do something useful to repay their debt to society. If that means fewer employees on the public payroll, so be it.

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#1836 Jan 12, 2013
imagine2011 wrote:
Leave our guns alone
Long time no see. Where have you been?

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#1837 Jan 12, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Mr. Expert on How Reader Thinks, not so sure why you need to ask, and I have explained this before, but here goes again.
Too many people are being killed senselessly--that is by accident or by the irrational actions of irrational persons who have guns. No single action is going to make all of that go away. However, the rate of incidence can be decreased through a comprehensive approach. Australia stands as a good first example.
Yes--the things that you mention (background checks, waiting periods, requirements for these things in person-to-person transfers), which serve to both limit legal sales to certain persons as well as to generally slow down the acquisition (standing in the way of certain emotionally triggered incidents) are likely to be helpful. And yes, I do advocate some limitations on the size/speed (forgive me for not being a weapons expert) of weaponry available to the average citizen. Guns, whatever else you hobbyists may insist they are used for, are instruments of killing. As such, it is reasonable to set limits on those designed for the mass and rapid killing of large numbers of persons. This cannot be justified by self-defense or hunting. If there is some usage within the context of "well-ordered militias," then I suggest that someone craft a legal definition of same and set parameters.
There is little doubt that mental health is sadly neglected in this country, nor that this has played a role in most, if not all, of the recent horrendous shoot-em-ups. We need both short and long-range solutions. We need to increase the numbers of available professionals available to treat those with diagnosed difficulties. We need adequate support for such persons in their communities (not every person with a diagnosis is a danger to self or others, recall), and we need to ensure mechanism for screenings and supervision so that when there are symptoms of decompensation (which frequently include going off of meds and denying treatment) that families and communities are not left resourceless in trying to prevent disasters.
Lastly, we need to be about consciously altering our point of view with regard to the notion of a handgun in every home bringing about some increased level of safety and protection. This does not seem to be the case--based on our over stats of both ownership and crime. And we need to stop teaching it to impressionable knuckle-heads with too easy access (albeit illegal) who may never live to outgrow their immature need to outgun someone else.
Were you beaten as a child for things your siblings did?

That's the only reason I can come up with for someone to think it's "normal" to punish one person for the deeds of another.

unless, of course, you're lying about your entire agenda.
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#1838 Jan 12, 2013
Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:
<quoted text>Long time no see. Where have you been?
Hi George

I've been busy with helping my Dad and they don't have internet there. I wondered how you guys were taking the Obama gun ban attempt that we all knew was coming.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#1839 Jan 12, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
What about them? As taxpayers, aren't we entitled to the most bang for our buck? No reason prisoners can't do something useful to repay their debt to society. If that means fewer employees on the public payroll, so be it.
Which means fewer people employed and fewer people paying taxes.
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

#1840 Jan 12, 2013
I have to go again, but you guys keep up the fight. Seems Obama is trying to start a civil war with his gun bans. He will get what he ask for, another civil war, thats for sure.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#1841 Jan 12, 2013
Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:
<quoted text>Long time no see. Where have you been?
Hiding the guns?

woof
Spookishere F trolls

Toledo, OH

#1842 Jan 12, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Mr. Expert on How Reader Thinks, not so sure why you need to ask, and I have explained this before, but here goes again.
Too many people are being killed senselessly--that is by accident or by the irrational actions of irrational persons who have guns. No single action is going to make all of that go away. However, the rate of incidence can be decreased through a comprehensive approach. Australia stands as a good first example.
Yes--the things that you mention (background checks, waiting periods, requirements for these things in person-to-person transfers), which serve to both limit legal sales to certain persons as well as to generally slow down the acquisition (standing in the way of certain emotionally triggered incidents) are likely to be helpful. And yes, I do advocate some limitations on the size/speed (forgive me for not being a weapons expert) of weaponry available to the average citizen. Guns, whatever else you hobbyists may insist they are used for, are instruments of killing. As such, it is reasonable to set limits on those designed for the mass and rapid killing of large numbers of persons. This cannot be justified by self-defense or hunting. If there is some usage within the context of "well-ordered militias," then I suggest that someone craft a legal definition of same and set parameters.
There is little doubt that mental health is sadly neglected in this country, nor that this has played a role in most, if not all, of the recent horrendous shoot-em-ups. We need both short and long-range solutions. We need to increase the numbers of available professionals available to treat those with diagnosed difficulties. We need adequate support for such persons in their communities (not every person with a diagnosis is a danger to self or others, recall), and we need to ensure mechanism for screenings and supervision so that when there are symptoms of decompensation (which frequently include going off of meds and denying treatment) that families and communities are not left resourceless in trying to prevent disasters.
Lastly, we need to be about consciously altering our point of view with regard to the notion of a handgun in every home bringing about some increased level of safety and protection. This does not seem to be the case--based on our over stats of both ownership and crime. And we need to stop teaching it to impressionable knuckle-heads with too easy access (albeit illegal) who may never live to outgrow their immature need to outgun someone else.
Words on paper have never defended my life or property. My ability to kill others before they killed me is what has saved my life and property. Why should the tools I use on my defense be limited.

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#1843 Jan 12, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Hiding the guns?
woof
Smart lady.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Sean Hannity 18 min 404 not found 1,038
Now it has a name: Crossfire Hurricane 4 hr Pope Che Reagan C... 259
Morgan Freeman | Just Another ,,,,,,, 4 hr They cannot kill ... 4
Elliot Rodger said_ No Girls Smiled At Me (May '14) 5 hr Yort 50
President Trump says Venezuela has freed Americ... 6 hr Reality Speaks 6
N.Korea wants Peace? Then destroy Their NUKES 8 hr Capt Pepe 10
News Democrats say FBI probe makes them unwilling to... 9 hr Reality Speaks 13

Columbus Jobs

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages